Ektalure

[Photo Engineer]

My post is not meant in the spirit of the obtuse. But a circle of thought makes me wonder about Cd, Ag, and Hg in mixture, and the purported environmental terrors of it. From there I wondered about centrifuges. We hear regularly about some countries who now have hundreds or thousands of them. And finally I wondered how many centrifuges were in Los Alamos in 1944 and 1945. Did they need a thousand centrifuges? So the circle of thought brings me back to the point. Would separating the effluent metals from emulsion production be all that hard to recover and reuse? These are 3 different metals with 3 different atomic weights. And PE discussed them as elements, not compounds. Just sounds too easy of a problem to solve. I get to say dumb things sometimes too.

They are compounds. Methy Mercuric Iodide, Cadmium (halide to match the product), and Lead (halide to match the product). The matching halide could be Iodide, Chloride or Bromide or a mix. The amount used would be quite different than that used in the Manhattan project, but since we at EK had several former engineers from that project and none had any ideas I assume the subject died. And remember that Uranium Hexafloride is a gas, not a solid or liquid and that all 3 of the chemicals I mentioned are water soluble and would have to be altered somehow.

PE

 

[M Carter]

They are compounds. Methy Mercuric Iodide, Cadmium (halide to match the product), and Lead (halide to match the product). The matching halide could be Iodide, Chloride or Bromide or a mix. The amount used would be quite different than that used in the Manhattan project, but since we at EK had several former engineers from that project and none had any ideas I assume the subject died. And remember that Uranium Hexafloride is a gas, not a solid or liquid and that all 3 of the chemicals I mentioned are water soluble and would have to be altered somehow.

PE

If were PE, I'd sit at the bar and talk like that all night. And watch the babes come running.

I mean, they'd be kinda nerdy babes, but really brainy, and they'd probably look cute in their glasses. Right up my alley!!!

 

[Roger Cole]

I have a couple of packages of 8x10 Ektalure that I picked up off eBay a couple of years ago and stashed in the freezer. I haven't tried it yet. Maybe when I do I'll be a convert and one of those begging for a similar paper.

But you know, today's papers are superb, at least for normal printing as I haven't tried lith etc.

 

[Photo Engineer]

If were PE, I'd sit at the bar and talk like that all night. And watch the babes come running.

I mean, they'd be kinda nerdy babes, but really brainy, and they'd probably look cute in their glasses. Right up my alley!!!

Never gonna happen. Usually I get a bunch of nerdy guys!

PE

 

[M Carter]

 

[John Shriver]

Was the "tone" of these papers consistent from shadow to highlight? Or was that what gave them their depth, different tones through the range?

While it's "treasonous" on APUG, one can get any curve one wants through digital means that ultimate expose photo paper.

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

Me? I guess I would go for Medalist. Maybe Opal.

PE

Opal... Fantastic paper !

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

I am very interested in working with experienced lith and bromoil printers to test various handmade papers for suitability. I would prefer to work with folks interested in testing a number of different papers over a couple of years time period. If anyone is interested, I'd love to discuss it. editor@thelightfarm.com. I only check email once or twice a day, so my "partners" also need to be patient! This will be "open source" research, so expect at least one Light Farm article over the course of the collaboration.

That would be very interesting.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Was the "tone" of these papers consistent from shadow to highlight? Or was that what gave them their depth, different tones through the range?

While it's "treasonous" on APUG, one can get any curve one wants through digital means that ultimate expose photo paper.

The tone of each paper was different but consistent from toe to shoulder.

PE

 

[mshchem]

Goodness I miss Medalist and Ektalure . Now my concern is keeping Ilford, Foma etc. alive and well. I would like to see a G surface like was offered by Kodak. Offer some different surfaces every few years make people line up to get them.

 

[Photo Engineer]

You all should know that FB paper itself is getting hard to obtain let alone in several surfaces. I have samples of FB and RC papers (uncoated) in 4 different surfaces, but when I inquired about them further, I was told they were not being made.

You can hand coat papers on silk, canvas, matte and watercolor among others to make fine art like papers that you can print some pretty fine pictures on. That is about the only option I know of.

PE

 

[sepiareverb]

I was told this is what happened to the first FOMA 532, the base was no longer made. That was my favorite surface ever.

 

[Lachlan Young]

You all should know that FB paper itself is getting hard to obtain let alone in several surfaces. I have samples of FB and RC papers (uncoated) in 4 different surfaces, but when I inquired about them further, I was told they were not being made.

You can hand coat papers on silk, canvas, matte and watercolor among others to make fine art like papers that you can print some pretty fine pictures on. That is about the only option I know of.

PE

The difficult bit seems to be the Baryta coating - why no one has come up with a smaller scale alternative to Schoeller's vast MOQ is a puzzle to me. That said, ART300 perhaps shows that both Harman & Hahnemuhle have interests in looking at alternatives - though whether people would be prepared to pay a premium for a greater choice of paper bases is an open question.

I take it that gloss, matte & most lustre FB papers all share a common substrate - ie the surface finish has to do with the supercoat & other emulsion layers? On which note, how is a lustre finish achieved?

 

[Photo Engineer]

There are only 2 or 3 manufacturers of FB paper. Baryta is not hard to make, just whip up a paste of Barium Sulfate in a vehicle + solvent and coat it properly along with calendaring properly. The problem is that the market for FB is so tiny compared to RC that Hahnemuhle is reluctant to make variations.

RC is far harder and more complex to make.

PE

 

[sepiareverb]

How much of the surface of a final print is the paper vs the emulsion?

 

[Photo Engineer]

All of the texture of the final print is due to the support except for matte. That is usually done by use of an overcoat.

PE

 

[sepiareverb]

Is this kind of info in a book somewhere?

 

[Lachlan Young]

There are only 2 or 3 manufacturers of FB paper. Baryta is not hard to make, just whip up a paste of Barium Sulfate in a vehicle + solvent and coat it properly along with calendaring properly. The problem is that the market for FB is so tiny compared to RC that Hahnemuhle is reluctant to make variations.

RC is far harder and more complex to make.

PE

The re-calendaring after Baryta coating was the bit I'd forgotten - I was initially thinking about whether a dandy roll was used during sheet formation, but a textured calendar roll after Baryta coating makes much more sense. Given the cost and lifespan of calendar rolls, I'd imagine that Kodak dumped a number of finishes after the rolls for some of the less popular ones wore out.

Hahnemuhle don't make RC base as far as I'm aware (though they do market RC inkjet, probably coated/ made by Sihl) - only fourdrinier & mouldmade bases of various sorts. The new Platinum Rag looks interesting for handcoated emulsions

 

[Photo Engineer]

Is this kind of info in a book somewhere?

Not AFAIK.

PE

 

[Arklatexian]

Me? I guess I would go for Medalist. Maybe Opal.

PE

Ahhh-Opal. I am glad you brought that paper up. Many years ago, I used an Opal paper whose surface was "completely dead". I refer to Opal "V". I used it when someone needed to show pictures to the TV cameras on "live television". How was that surface obtained? In the darkroom you sometimes had to touch the paper with your tongue to find the emulsion side of your paper. With what I now know about cadmium, I would sure find a better way. Most of us in those days never knew what was in the emulsions other than silver (and lots of it)...........Regards!

 

[sepiareverb]

The original 532 FOMA pape was so close to that Kodak V. Incredible.

 

[dwross]

Is this kind of info in a book somewhere?

Yes, and it's excellent. Kit Funderburk was a paper engineer at Kodak and wrote a couple of short but fact-filled books. He was an early contributor to The Light Farm, and I haven't been in communication with him for a number of years, so I can't say that the following contact info will help, but give it a try. If you can't get ahold of Kit's books from him personally, you might try George Eastman Museum (formerly G.E. House) or RIT. Anyway, a straight copy/paste from TLF:

Kit Funderburk
We have a rare and valuable opportunity to expand our knowledge of the iconic Kodak papers. Kit Funderburk was a papermaker at Kodak and today is an historian of photographic papers. Kit isn’t an emulsion maker, per se, but he understands the substrates and the essential character they bring to b&w paper. It is his belief that we should be able to get very close to the original papers — closer even than I had dared hope.

Here is Kit’s contribution to us:

“In 2006, I edited/authored a book (spiral bound booklet) titled History of the Paper Mills at Kodak Park which was intended as a memento for Kodak papermakers (the last papermachine was dismantled in 2005). I won’t go into the details but that book led to lots of questions about the history of the fiber based B&W papers so I wrote a second book in 2007 titled A Guide to the Surface Characteristics, Kodak Fiber Based Black and White Papers. I’m strictly a papermaker (retired). The books are about manufacturing paper support and there is nothing about emulsions, emulsion coating, or photo products (subjects I don’t know much about). Both books are available at no charge though I do ask that requesters cover the mailing costs. The mailing cost is $4.60 within most of the US but is as high as $14.00 for some international locations. If you would like a copy or want more info you can contact me at ‘KitFunderburk at gmail dot com’. I'll also be happy to try to answer questions here.”

 

[sepiareverb]

Yes, and it's excellent. Kit Funderburk was a paper engineer at Kodak and wrote a couple of short but fact-filled books. He was an early contributor to The Light Farm, and I haven't been in communication with him for a number of years, so I can't say that the following contact info will help, but give it a try. If you can't get ahold of Kit's books from him personally, you might try George Eastman Museum (formerly G.E. House) or RIT….

Thank you! I read a great memoir by an old Kodak guy this past winter, about setting up buildings at Kodak Park in the 20s and 30s. I've lost the book to my disorganized bookshelves at the moment, but it will turn up. I believe it had Ekatachrome in the title? Perhaps "From Something to Ektachrome"? I will look this up!
-Bob

Just found the book I mention above on Lightfarm: From Dry Plates to Ektachrome Film, A Story of Photographic Research, C. E. Kenneth Mees, Ziff-Davis Publishing Company, 1961.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I've loved just about any paper that Kodak made that ended in -lure. But yes, Medalist, Opal, Velox... Amazing. And as I understand it, from grade to grade the graded papers would be consistent in speed. Wouldn't that be nice to have?!

 

[dwross]

That "old Kodak guy" was C.E.K. Mees. He was the head of Kodak research for over 50 years from almost the beginning and essentially invented most of what we know about modern photographic materials manufacturing. He was a prodigious writer, and everything he wrote is excellent. Here's the book you read last winter:

From Dry Plates to Ektachrome Film, A Story of Photographic Research, C. E. Kenneth Mees, Ziff-Davis Publishing Company, 1961.